The working aero engine takes you to the scene of the crash.
So at least one guy apparently caught on that the "pointless, fuzzy math" that I put in an earlier post was borrowed from the aviation anal;ogue. Clearly a motor failure in a BEV is not going to result in a change in altitude and, clearly, with a dual motor vehicle, you are going to continue in a straight line. But if you had a motor failure in one of the rear motors in a TriMotor there would be a torque to the side of the failed motor. In an airplane this is a big deal as most single englne failures occur at takeoff but are rare enough that pilots aren't trained enough in engine failure, don't remember "dead foot, dead engine" and feather the wrong prop. Assuming he gets the correct prop feathered obviously he must hold a lot of rudder (or set a lot of rudder trim) to the good engine side and this increases drag, which with, the loss of power from the failed engine, results in a lower service ceiling. I remember looking pretty seriously at a twin many years ago only to drop it like a hot potato when a guy I met at a party who worked for the FAA pointed out that this model would not hold altitude on 1 engine. I don't think any commercial aircraft would get certified could it not hold altitude in the case of engine failure(s).
Congratulations AJ!! That’s awesome!
It is much easier to put something that is invisible together such that it is functional and safe than it is to decorate something in an aesthetically pleasing way.
